kevo
Well-known member
- Mar 8, 2008
- 10,390
There's a few comments like that, but mostly they are squealing about how unfair it is and how corrupt UEFA are.
[Football] If Palace can't play in the Europa League
- Thread starter B-right-on
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Albion Robster
Well-known member
Kieran Maguire just said on SkySportsNews:
- Most appropriate penalty would be a financial penalty to the Nigels.
- Apparently UEFA have no desire for CPFC to be banned from UEFA competition.
- Most appropriate penalty would be a financial penalty to the Nigels.
- Apparently UEFA have no desire for CPFC to be banned from UEFA competition.
A financial penalty would need to be significant or they still benefit. I can’t imagine bloom and forest Greek would just say “fair enough” given they have changed structures.
Whose side is he on?
Stumpy Tim
Well-known member
Not Wolves clearly
From holmesdale
"Well, good motivation for Textor to f*** off as soon as possible then isn't it! As usual, Steve Parish completely bang on in his distrust for group ownership."
"The sooner he fucks off the better for all concerned. Thanks for the money John but we don't need or like erratic and that's you all over"
"We could change the name of the stadium to "Textor Is A W**ker Stadium".
Changing a stadium name is a sufficiently big decision that it should be approved by the board and it will be clear to UEFA he didn't manage to influence the result."
"Beyond that - SP, has repeatedly said he wants to take us to the next level and into Europe..!! So that in mind he was either selling us a “pipe dream” that he thought would never happen and he was happy to keep up his unsubstantiated rhetoric - and us to be mid-table mediocrity every season..!!"
"If we don't get in, the HF know where the UEFA offices are." "
"Actually, they probably don't. But they can Google it."
"And do what? Wave a tifo at them?"
"Bang a drum outside at all hours. They'll cave quickly enough."
"You got to look at it like this - Parish messed up big time, by not getting this sorted before the March deadline
SP loves all the plaudits when things go well - but he’s very well paid for what he does and basically he dropped the ball on this one and messed up big time..!!"
Last edited:
US Seagull
Well-known member
I can think of two reasons
1. To cover their ass
2. To run the clock down and leave little time for appeal.
A financial fine is absolutely perfect for Bluegroup (Chelsea) or Citygroup (City). I suspect they'll happily pay the fines each year to avoid the regulations. This would be the green light to to massively expand their multi-club models.
I love to listen to that - do you have a link?
I'm sure Kieran gives his reasons, and I'd be interested to hear them.
I'm curious as to why a fine would be an appropriate penalty? Has this happened before? Perhaps there are examples I'm unaware of.
The second point is fair enough, they probably have no desire to ban Accrington Stanley either, but rules are rules, shirley?
That'll be UEFA bottling it.
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,709
I cannot see how a financial penalty would be appropriate. The rules relate to eligibility to play in the relevant competition. Fair enough if UEFA accept that Palace are indeed abiding by the rules and are eligible to compete, then let them play. If they are considered to be in breach the penalty has to be non-participation in the competition. On what grounds would a financial penalty be appropriate, I just cannot see it.
Interesting - Kieran is VERY well-informed, but I would find a financial penalty a bizarre outcome (on the basis of what we know). UEFA's regulations are pretty clear: "If two or more clubs fail to meet the criteria aimed at ensuring the integrity of the competition, only one of them may be admitted to a UEFA club competition..."
It does NOT say that "we'll let both in, but one of them will be fined" !!
And I'm also not clear why - if there were to be a fine - that Lyon wouldn't also be fined....Textor could easily have put his Lyon shares in a blind trust, and the matter would have been resolved. There's nothing in UEFA's rules, as far as I can see, which set out a fining system for clubs which don't comply with the MCO rules.
I'm inclined to agree. It might punish Palace, but it sets a precedent in terms of punishment that wouldn't dissuade mega-rich clubs from flouting the rules. That's why I wondered if there was a precedent for a fine being an appropriate punishment. Feels very weak-handed to me.
My Palace mate says the odds of all this happening before 1st March were calculated at 400/1, and so it’s unfair to blame Parish etc for not seeing it.
Pretty sure Bloom would have done though.
Albion Robster
Well-known member
Sorry Mr Biscuit I don't. I was working from home and had the telebox on the in the background.
Kieran was being interviewed about the transfer window, then the presenter asked him about Palarse situation at the end of the segment. The Smug Kevin Day was on SkySportsNews about 30 mins earlier, pleading innocence and hard done for the case against CPFC.
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 7,860
I can't for the life of me work out how Parish has managed to wangle his position at Palace. One of four investors to pay £3.5m to buy them when they were in administration. Sold his business and now Palace seems to be his only business. Sold a stake to Harris and Blitzer, but remained in control:
Crystal Palace deal agreed by American businessmen
Sky Sports News HQ understands that a group of American businessmen, led by Josh Harris and David Blitzer, have agreed a £100m deal to buy a controlling stake in Crystal Palace.
Insisted that Textor buy more shares if he was going to do the necessary to allow the investment in Lyon, but still retained control:
Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish in fall-out with club’s biggest investor John Textor
Textor has increased his stake in Crystal Palace to more than 40% despite tension after his acquisition of Lypn was delayed by a decision Parish took
www.theguardian.com
All the while taking a seven figure salary that has presumably repaid his investment several times over. This was five years ago:
Has such a poor relationship with Textor that Ed Aarons' report says that they were hardly speaking. Not surprising when Textor has a 43% share that apparently gives him only 25% of voting rights, equal to someone with about 10% who is taking a massive annual salary. Presumably, although the risk was apparent, Parish didn't speak to Textor about going down the blind trust route, either because they weren't talking or because the American was reported to be trying to take over This is as recent as last month:
John Textor launches plan for audacious takeover of Crystal Palace
John Textor, who faces competition from the NY Jets owner Woody Johnson, is in talks with Crystal Palace’s other main shareholders to increase his stake in the club to 80%
www.theguardian.com
I guess that he's looking to buy because he's got such a rubbish deal that he'd struggle to sell. Presumably, without control, he's not going to be keen to shell out for the mythical new stadium (now reduced to a redeveloped stand?)
Did Kevin do his side-splittingly funny "Brighton fans are middle class" routine? He must have managed an unfunny hummous joke, at least?
Any Albion fan who feels any sympathy with Palace’s plight needs to take a long hard look at themselves.
Poogate, that they all thought was hilarious, jumping the turnstiles at the Amex,the constant abuse Lewis Dunk gets.
And that’s only the supporters, the club is a nasty, grubby, little boil on the arse of London.
Poogate, that they all thought was hilarious, jumping the turnstiles at the Amex,the constant abuse Lewis Dunk gets.
And that’s only the supporters, the club is a nasty, grubby, little boil on the arse of London.
BTW, just to say I'm fully on board with a fine as long as the fine is so huge they get done for FFP and get relegated to the Croydon Scouts league